Invalid permutation tests (Q978997): Difference between revisions

From MaRDI portal
Added link to MaRDI item.
ReferenceBot (talk | contribs)
Changed an Item
 
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Property / author
 
Property / author: Aickin, Mikel / rank
Normal rank
 
Property / author
 
Property / author: Aickin, Mikel / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / MaRDI profile type
 
Property / MaRDI profile type: MaRDI publication profile / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / OpenAlex ID
 
Property / OpenAlex ID: W2076379480 / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / cites work
 
Property / cites work: Q3262608 / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / cites work
 
Property / cites work: Concepts of nonparametric theory / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / cites work
 
Property / cites work: On the Behavior of Randomization Tests Without a Group Invariance Assumption / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / cites work
 
Property / cites work: PERMUTATION TESTS AND OTHER TEST STATISTICS FOR ILL-BEHAVED DATA: EXPERIENCE OF THE NINDS t-PA STROKE TRIAL / rank
 
Normal rank

Latest revision as of 22:30, 2 July 2024

scientific article
Language Label Description Also known as
English
Invalid permutation tests
scientific article

    Statements

    Invalid permutation tests (English)
    0 references
    25 June 2010
    0 references
    Summary: Permutation tests are often presented in a rather casual manner, in both introductory and advanced statistics textbooks. The appeal of the cleverness of the procedure seems to replace the need for a rigorous argument that it produces valid hypothesis tests. The consequence of this educational failing has been a widespread belief in a ``permutation principle'', which is supposed invariably to give tests that are valid by construction, under an absolute minimum of statistical assumptions. Several lines of arguments are presented here to show that the permutation principle itself can be invalid, concentrating on the Fisher-Pitman permutation test for two means. A simple counterfactual example illustrates the general problem, and a slightly more elaborate counterfactual argument is used to explain why the main mathematical proof of the validity of permutation tests is mistaken. Two modifications of the permutation test are suggested to be valid in a very modest simulation. In instances where simulation software is readily available, investigating the validity of a specific permutation test can be done easily, requiring only a minimum understanding of statistical technicalities.
    0 references
    0 references

    Identifiers

    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references